[ChuChu @ Jan 16th 2006 1:50PM]

I always get a laugh out of people predicting "ipod killers", especially when it's from a CEO of some company who is getting trounced by Apple. They make a player with slightly superior specs and then don't understand why it doesn't do well.



Guess what, the ipod is a @#$#@$ fashion accessory. 90% of the people buying them don't know what the specs mean let alone care about them. It's like trying to tell someone "hey don't spend $1200 on a louis vuitton bag when you can get this korean made bag for $100 that's actually superior". They are paying for the name, they want the name.



Now if it sounds like I'm bashing apple, I'm certainly not. I have an ipod and I love it. What I am saying is that in order to come up with an "ipod killer", you not only have to make something technologically superior with an online component at least as good as itunes but you also have to somehow gain the same sort of cultural cache that the ipod currently boasts and that is what these CEOs just don't get.



If anyone can do it, it's going to be MS. They have the software already in place (mediaplayer) so that's not a problem. They have the warchest to sell devices at a loss to gain market share. They have the recognizable name that everyone and their brother knows. Can MS create something fashionable? That's the tough one. They certainly have enough money to throw at it.